Cate Blanchett’s AI warning

By Noel Galon de Leon

When Cate Blanchett walked into the European Parliament in Brussels, she did not simply bring Hollywood glamour into a room filled with policymakers and technology advocates. She brought a question that may soon become one of the defining issues of our generation: Who owns a person’s identity in the age of artificial intelligence?

The award-winning actor launched the Human Consent Registry, a free public tool that allows individuals to declare how their name, image, voice, likeness, movement, and other personal attributes may be used by AI systems. The platform gives people the option to allow, restrict, or prohibit the use of their identity by artificial intelligence.

At first glance, this may appear to be a Hollywood concern. After all, celebrities have long experienced the reproduction of their faces, voices, and personalities through entertainment and advertising. But Blanchett’s argument reaches far beyond celebrity protection. It raises a larger concern about every person whose digital identity can now be collected, analyzed, copied, and recreated.

Her message reveals a disturbing reality about artificial intelligence. Technology can now reproduce the very things that make a person recognizable. A face, a voice, a gesture, even a unique way of expression can become material for machines.

The question is no longer only whether AI can create these copies. The bigger question is whether people have the right to decide how their identity is used.

And this conversation should not remain in Brussels. It should reach Iloilo City.

In a community where students, artists, educators, professionals, and creators actively share their work and personal stories online, AI brings both opportunities and risks. A photograph uploaded for a school event, a performance video shared publicly, or a recorded speech can become part of a digital world where control over personal identity is increasingly uncertain.

The irony of the AI era is that we have never been more connected, yet we may have less control over how we are represented.

For Iloilo, a city known for its creativity, heritage, festivals, and cultural expression, this issue deserves serious attention. Local artists and cultural workers continuously produce works that reflect identity and community. But as AI becomes more advanced, there is a possibility that human creativity and personal identity may be copied, transformed, or reused without meaningful consent.

Imagine an artist’s voice recreated without permission. A teacher’s image appearing in content they never made. A person’s likeness being used in ways they never approved.

The debate is not simply about whether AI is beneficial or harmful. Technology itself is not the enemy. The real challenge is ensuring that innovation does not move faster than human rights and ethical responsibility.

Blanchett’s initiative challenges the belief that progress must come at the expense of consent. It reminds us that people should not become raw material for technology without having a say.

However, this conversation must move beyond Hollywood. A tool created with celebrities in mind should eventually protect ordinary people as well. In the Philippines, where social media is deeply part of daily life, awareness about digital identity and responsible AI use is becoming increasingly important.

The future may not ask only if AI can copy us.

It may ask something more uncomfortable:

If machines can recreate what makes us recognizable, who decides what belongs to us?

Cate Blanchett’s warning from Brussels is not just about protecting famous personalities. It is about protecting something much more fundamental: the right of every person to have ownership over their own identity.

***

Noel Galon de Leon is a writer and professor at the University of the Philippines Visayas, where he teaches in the Division of Professional Education and at UP High School in Iloilo. He is also the Secretary of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts-National Committee on Literary Arts.